Easier To Demonize The Opponent Than To Take Issue With The Point Of View

KINGSLEY GUY

May 4, 1995|KINGSLEY GUY

President Bill Clinton has climbed the bully pulpit to decry the anger and hate punctuating today's political and social discourse.

That's part of the presidential job description. As the nation's top elected leader, Clinton has an obligation to assert the moral authority of the office on behalf of civilized behavior.

Unfortunately, Clinton is too narrowly focused. His fusillades are directed at right-wing radio talk show hosts and other "conservatives" who play on the anger of a large segment of the American people. He should take off the blinders so he can view the entire panorama.

During the debate over welfare reform in the House of Representatives, various Democrats rose to denounce the reformers as Nazis. The Nazis were people of Germanic origin who brought on World War II. They established a new standard for sadism and depravity. Why people who advocate a work requirement and time limits for those on welfare qualify as Nazis is beyond me. Yet they were condemned as such in the nation's Capitol, and not a peep was heard from the president criticizing this hateful speech.

Religion and religious leaders often are targets of venomous attacks from various media, including both "alternative" and mainstream newspapers. The pope and Pat Robertson, among others, are the subjects of vicious jeremiads, and their followers are attacked in print with the coarsest invectives.

Religion over the centuries certainly has earned its share of criticism, and it is open to criticism today. But crude name-calling doesn't cut it.

In the 18th century, Voltaire took on the excesses of religion with wit and sophistication. The 20th century has seen the silly, profiteering approach of a slob-entertainer ripping up a picture of the pope.

Attacks on religion even have degenerated into the publicly funded display of a photograph of a crucifix in a vat of urine. This doesn't qualify as hateful speech, but it certainly qualifies as hateful, government-subsidized expression.

Gun owners have been neatly lumped into the single category of "gun nut" by pundits who have never even held a gun, let alone fired one. A colleague of mine once informed me the only purpose of a handgun was to kill people. She apparently forgot, or never knew, that a person can win an Olympic medal for target shooting.

People more and more are refusing to recognize there may be validity in perspectives other than their own. Consequently, what the French call a "dialogue of the deaf" is developing in the United States. Rather than seeking to understand each other, Americans are immediately demonizing those who don't think like they do.

People who never have had a transformative religious experience conclude these don't exist, and condemn all religious people as superstitious, self-deceiving fools. The religious, on the other hand, too often see a need to impose their brand of faith and morals on others, and render under Caesar that which is God's.

Radical "militiamen" give rugged individualism a bad name by claiming such things as their constitutional rights are being violated because government requires driver's licenses.

Their polar opposites, on the other hand, ignore the fact that some intelligent people, including Jefferson and Madison, recognized a point can be reached when armed rebellion against a truly oppressive government is justified.

Rather than arriving at consensus through reasonable dialogue, the nation is polarizing because of intransigent attitudes born largely from ignorance. So keep up your condemnations of the hatemongers from your bully pulpit, Mr. President. But please, don't ignore the hatemongers in your own constituency.